scieee Science in your language
[en] (orig)

Corporate social responsibility and network externalities: a game-theoretic approach

Abstract

This research revisits the pioneering work by Katz and Shapiro (Am Econom Rev 75:424–440, 1985) with network (consumption) externalities in a twofold way: first, it con siders Corporate Socially Responsible (CSR), instead of profit-maximising, firms; second, it uses a game-theoretic approach and analyses the commitment decision game in which firms face the binary choice to credibly commit (C) or not to commit (NC) themselves to an announced output level in the first decision-making stage. Competition at the market stage occurs à la Cournot. Results show a rich spectrum of sub-game perfect Nash equilibrium (SPNE) outcomes, ranging from the prisoner’s dilemma (self-interest and mutual benefit of output commitment conflict) to the anti-prisoner’s dilemma or deadlock (self-interest and mutual benefit of output commitment do not conflict), passing from the coordination to the anti-coordination game. These outcomes depend on the intensity of the social concern in the firm’s objective and the network size. The article also pinpoints the welfare outcomes corresponding to the SPNE and extends the analysis to a Stackelberg rivalry setting.

Read accessible full text

Corporate social responsibility and network externalities: a game-theoretic approach

Author: Buccella, Domenico
Publisher: Springer Nature
Year: 2023
DOI: 10.1007/s10479-023-05601-1
Source: https://dspace.vsb.cz/bitstreams/ff119366-33b3-4fac-99a4-d0756d93db50/download
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s10479-023-05601-1
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Co po a e social esponsibili y and ne wo k ex e nali ies:
a game- heo e ic app oach
Domenico Buccella1·Luciano Fan i2·Luca Go i3·Mau o Sodini4,5
Recei ed: 26 Janua y 2023 / Accep ed: 8 Sep embe 2023
© The Au ho (s) 2023
Abs ac
This esea ch e isi s he pionee ing wo k by Ka z and Shapi o (Am Econom Re
75:424–440, 1985) wi h ne wo k (consump ion) ex e nali ies in a wo old way: i s , i con-
side s Co po a e Socially Responsible (CSR), ins ead o p o i -maximising, i ms; second,
i uses a game- heo e ic app oach and analyses he commi men decision game in which
i ms ace he bina y choice o c edibly commi (C) o no o commi (NC) hemsel es oan
announced ou pu le el in he i s decision-making s age. Compe i ion a he ma ke s age
occu s à la Cou no . Resul s show a ich spec um o sub-game pe ec Nash equilib ium
(SPNE) ou comes, anging om he p isone ’s dilemma (sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o
ou pu commi men con lic ) o he an i-p isone ’s dilemma o deadlock (sel -in e es and
mu ual bene i o ou pu commi men do no con lic ), passing om he coo dina ion o he
an i-coo dina ion game. These ou comes depend on he in ensi y o he social conce n in
he i m’s objec i e and he ne wo k size. The a icle also pinpoin s he wel a e ou comes
co esponding o he SPNE and ex ends he analysis o a S ackelbe g i al y se ing.
BLuca Go i
[email p o ec ed]; d [email p o ec ed]
Domenico Buccella
[email protected]
Luciano Fan i
[email p o ec ed]
Mau o Sodini
[email p o ec ed]
1Depa men o Economics, Kozminski Uni e si y, Jagiello´nska S ee , 57/59, 03301 Wa saw,
Poland
2Depa men o Economics and Managemen , Uni e si y o Pisa, Via Cosimo Ridol i, 10,
I–56124 Pisa (PI), I aly
3Depa men o Law, Uni e si y o Pisa, Via Collegio Ricci, 10, I–56126 Pisa (PI), I aly
4Depa men o Law, Uni e si y o Naples “Fede ico II”, Via Mezzocannone 16, I–80134 Naples
(NA), I aly
5Depa men o Finance, Facul y o Economics, Technical Uni e si y o Os a a, Os a a, Czech
Republic
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
Keywo ds Ne wo k ex e nali y ·Cou no and S ackelbe g duopolies ·Commi men ·
Co po a e social esponsibili y
JEL Classi ica ion H23 ·L13 ·O31
1 In oduc ion
This a icle examines a quan i y-se ing (Cou no ) duopoly wi h Co po a e Socially Respon-
sible (CSR) i ms and ne wo k ex e nali ies in consump ion,1 ep esen ing wo pilla s o
mode n indus ies amed in a s a egic con ex . I ollows he pionee ing wo k by Ka z &
Shapi o (1985), who exogenously dis inguish he cases in which i ms commi and do no
commi o a publicly announced ou pu le el, and s udies he commi men decision game
wi h CSR ins ead o p o i -maximising i ms, which has ecen ly been conside ed by Choi &
Lim (2022). The a icle belongs o a li e a u e on he opic o he iming o commi men and
expec a ions o ma ion mechanisms in s a egic ma ke s wi h ne wo k e ec s (e.g., G i a &
Ve as, 2011; Hagiu & Halabu da, 2014; Leppänen, 2020; Nakamu a, 2021; Suleymano a &
Wey, 2012; Toshimi su, 2019,2021).
Engagemen in CSR has ecen ly eme ged as a dominan global business p ac ice and has
been he esul o wo main o ces. On one hand, he expec a ions o he public audience and
he o e all socie y o business a e ising. As McKinsey (2019) epo s, cus ome in e es in
being in o med abou companies’ engagemen in en i onmen al and social issues has g own;
cus ome s also s ongly belie e ha companies ha e a esponsibili y on hose subjec s. On he
o he hand,aglobalsu eyo 350businessleade sconduc edbyDeloi e(2019)(incollabo a-
ionwi hFo bes) e eals ha businessleade sa edeeplycon incedo oleo i msass ewa ds
o socie y, and hey a e planning o engage mo e on socie al-impac issues in he nex u u e.
CSR has also become an issue o bu geoning impo ance in he academic li e a u e
(e.g., Ba on, 2001,2009; Goe ing, 2007,2008; Ga cía-Gallego & Geo gan zís, 2009;
Lambe ini & Tampie i, 2010,2015; Bénabou & Ti ole, 2010;Kopele al.,2014; Kopel
& Laman ia, 2018). Amongs he indus ies ha ha e expe ienced ex ao dina y p og ess
in CSR ac i i ies in ecen yea s, i is ema kable o ind a leading posi ion p ecisely in
hose p oducing ne wo k goods. Fo ins ance, acco ding o a KPMG epo , he echnology,
media & elecommunica ions sec o p esen s 79 pe cen o he companies su eyed
epo ing CSR ac i i ies, he highes le el amongs he su eyed indus ies. Speci ically, he
elecommunica ion subsec o shows he highes a e o CSR epo ing, wi h 87 pe cen o
he companies (KPMG, 2015,2017).
The ema kable de elopmen pace o ne wo k indus ies has led an inc easing numbe o
schola s o s a s udying how consump ion ex e nali ies may al e he esul s o he s an-
da d models o impe ec compe i ion amed in s a egic con ex s (Ka z & Shapi o, 1985),
ocusing also on he ole o monopoly (Cab al e al., 1990), R&D inno a ion (Buccella e al.,
2022a;Cab al,1990;Naska &Pal,2020;Sh i as a ,2021) s a egic delega ion (Bha acha -
jee & Pal, 2014; Chi co & Sc imi o e, 2013;Hoe nig,2012), and unionised labou ma ke
and code e mina ion (Fan i & Buccella, 2016; Fan i & Go i, 2019).
The beha iou o i ms unde ne wo k consump ion ex e nali ies is wo old (Ka z &
Shapi o, 1985): hey can o canno commi o a publicly known ou pu le el. This choice, in
1Ne wo k goods can gene a e posi i e ( esp. nega i e) ex e nali ies, in u n, causing he so-called bandwagon
( esp. snob) e ec : he desi e o ha e ( esp. no o ha e) some goods because almos e e yone else has hem.
A ypical example is he posi i e ( esp. nega i e) ea u e o ashion due o widesp ead b ands.
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
u n, a ec s he size o he ma ke , he consume wel a e, p o i s and social wel a e. I i ms
canno c edibly commi hemsel es o an announced ou pu le el, each o hem ollows he
s anda d Cou no assump ion ha he ac ual ou pu o he i al is ixed and hen i chooses i s
p oduc ion by assuming ha he consume s’ expec a ions abou he size o he ne wo k a e
gi en. In his case “a i m’s announcemen o i s planned le el o ou pu does no a ec con-
sume expec a ions” (Ka z & Shapi o, 1985, p. 440). I i ms can c edibly commi hemsel es
o an announced ou pu le el, consume s know he selec ed ou pu and hen expec a ions a e
equal o he commi ed p oduc ion. The key di e ence be ween hese cases is ha unde ull
commi men “ i m ican di ec ly in luence consume s’ expec a ions ega ding i s ne wo k
size”, hus ge ing “ he s anda d Cou no equilib ium wi h demand-side economies o scale”
(Ka z & Shapi o, 1985, p. 440).
The p esen a icle ex ends Ka z & Shapi o (1985) in a wo old way: (1) i conside s CSR,
ins ead o p o i -maximising, i ms, and (2) i uses a game- heo e ic app oach o analyse
he CSR commi men decision game (CSR-CDG hence o h) in which i ms ace he bina y
choice o commi (C)o no ocommi (NC) hemsel es o an announced ou pu le el in
he i s (decision-making) s age, and hen de e mine he endogenous ma ke con igu a ion.
These wo scena ios (Cand NC) we e aken exogenously and analysed sepa a ely in he
o iginal con ibu ion o Ka z & Shapi o (1985). Howe e , his choice has impo an s a egic
e ec s, wi h implica ions on he endogenous eme gence o sub-game pe ec Nash equi-
lib ium (SPNE) and social wel a e e ec s, which ins ead de e mine some possible policy
implica ions. These e ec s ha e been poin ed ou only ecen ly by Choi & Lim (2022)in
a ele an con ibu ion s udying he CDG wi h p o i -maximising i ms. Dealing wi h CSR
i ms, he p esen con ibu ion shows sha p di e ences in he p e ailing SPNE compa ed he
esul s ound by Choi & Lim (2022). This is because o he s a egic e ec s gene a ed by he
ex en o he deg ee o social conce n in he i m’s objec i e.
I i ms a e p o i -maximising (Choi & Lim, 2022), he ou comes o he CDG a e he
ollowing:
•I he ne wo k ex e nali y is posi i e, he unique Pa e o ine icien SPNE is (C,C).The
CDG is a p isone ’s dilemma in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu commi -
men con lic when he ex en o he nega i e ne wo k e ec is su icien ly low (n<0.75),
whe e −1<n<1 is he s eng h o he consump ion ne wo k ex e nali y. The CDG
becomes an an i-p isone ’s dilemma (deadlock) in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i
o ou pu commi men do no con lic when he ex en o he nega i e ne wo k e ec is
su icien ly high (n>0.75). Unde ou pu commi men i ms p oduce mo e han unde
ou pu non-commi men due o he bandwagon e ec gene a ed by he posi i e ne wo k
ex e nali y. In his case, he commi men s a egy ends o incen i ise i ms o p oduce a
highe ou pu han he non-commi men s a egy because o he la ge (ou wa d) shi in he
ma ke demand o he ne wo k goods gene a ed by he posi i e ex e nali y ha commi ing
in ad ance, in u n, causes compa ed o non-commi ing in ad ance o a gi en ou pu le el.
I he ne wo k e ec is ela i ely low, Cis a dominan s a egy bu i ms a e en apped in a
dilemma as hey could join ly ob ain a highe p o i by playing NC, bu nei he would like
o be he one ha unila e ally ob ains he lowes payo h ough he NC s a egy. La ge
alues o he ne wo k e ec allow i ms o sol e he dilemma as he inc ease in he ou pu
sus ained by he highe demand inc eases p o i s unde he Cs a egy le ing hem when
bo h i ms play Cgo beyond he co esponding alue i bo h played NC. Commi ing o
an announced ou pu le el, he e o e, has a ele an s a egic alue in a non-coope a i e
con ex as, e.g., he manage ial delega ion de ice.
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
•I he ne wo k ex e nali y is nega i e, he unique Pa e o ine icien SPNE is (NC,NC)
and he CDG is a p isone ’s dilemma in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu
non-commi men con lic . This holds i espec i e o he ex en o he nega i e ne wo k
e ec . Unde ou pu commi men i ms p oduce less han unde ou pu non-commi men
due o he snob e ec gene a ed by he nega i e ne wo k ex e nali y. In his case, he
non-commi men s a egy ends o incen i ise i ms o p oduce a highe ou pu han he
commi men s a egy because o he la ge (inwa d) shi in he ma ke demand o he
ne wo k goods gene a ed by he nega i e ex e nali y ha commi ing in ad ance, in u n,
causes compa ed o non-commi ing in ad ance o a gi en ou pu le el. Gi en he snob
e ec , NC is a dominan s a egy bu i ms a e en apped in a dilemma as hey could join ly
ob ain a highe p o i by playing C, bu nei he would like o be he one ha unila e ally
ob ains he lowes payo h ough he Cs a egy.
I i ms a e socially o ien ed (CSR), he e a e ele an changes in he p e ailing SPNE
o he CSR-CDG compa ed o Choi & Lim (2022). An inc ease in he weigh o he social
conce n in he i m’s objec i e ends o a ou he eme gence o he no-commi men scena io
i he ne wo k ex e nali y is posi i e and he commi men scena io i he ne wo k ex e nali y
is nega i e. This is because i ms p oduce mo e unde C( esp. NC) han unde NC ( esp.
C) i he ne wo k ex e nali y is posi i e ( esp. nega i e). Fo any gi en alue o he posi i e
ne wo k s eng h, he mo e i ms a e socially o ien ed, he la ge he inc ease in he ou pu
hey would ge by choosing o commi in ad ance o an announced ou pu le el and he
lowe he p ice consume s a e willing o pay. The o me e ec inc eases p o i s. The la e
e ec educes p o i s. When he ex en o he i m social conce n is high enough, he nega i e
p ice e ec domina es he posi i e quan i y e ec and p o i s unde C educe, hus a ou ing
he eme gence o NC as a dominan s a egy leading o a Pa e o e icien SPNE in which
sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu non-commi men do no con lic unde posi i e
ne wo k e ec s. Unlike his, o any gi en alue o he nega i e ne wo k s eng h, he mo e
i ms a e socially o ien ed, he la ge he inc ease in he ou pu hey would ge by choosing
no o commi in ad ance o an announced ou pu le el and he lowe he p ice consume s
a e willing o pay. The o me e ec inc eases p o i s. The la e e ec educes p o i s. When
he ex en o he i m social conce n is high enough, he nega i e p ice e ec domina es he
posi i e quan i y e ec and p o i s unde NC educe, hus a ou ing he eme gence o C
as a dominan s a egy leading o a Pa e o e icien SPNE in which sel -in e es and mu ual
bene i o ou pu commi men do no con lic unde nega i e ne wo k e ec s.
To sum up, he mo e i ms a e socially o ien ed he mo e he CSR-CDG shows sha p
di e en SPNE ou comes han he CDG wi h p o i -maximising i ms. The main di e ences
a e epo ed below by dis inguishing be ween posi i e and nega i e ne wo k e ec s.
1.1 Posi i e ne wo k e ec s
•I he bandwagon e ec is high enough, he SPNE would be he Pa e o e icien (C,C),
wi h he CSR-CDG being an an i-p isone ’s dilemma in which sel -in e es and mu ual
bene i o ou pu commi men do no con lic i he i m social conce n is su icien ly
low. An inc ease in he i m social conce n allows o he eme gence o wo asymme ic,
Pa e o e icien SPNE, (C,NC)and (NC,C). The e o e, he CSR-CDG becomes an an i-
coo dina ion game wi h inde e minacy ins ead o an an i-p isone ’s dilemma wi h a unique
SPNE in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu commi men do no con lic .
•I he bandwagon e ec is lowe , he SPNE would be he Pa e o ine icien (C,C) wi h he
CSR-CDG being a p isone ’s dilemma in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
commi men con lic i he i m social conce n is su icien ly low. An inc ease in he i m
social conce n changes he pa adigm o he game by allowing o he eme gence o (C,C)
as he unique Pa e o e icien SPNE, so ha he CSR-CDG becomes an an i-p isone ’s
dilemma in which sel -in e es andCmu ual bene i o ou pu non-commi men do no
con lic .
1.2 Nega i e ne wo k e ec s
•The SPNE would be he Pa e o ine icien (NC,NC) wi h he CSR-CDG being a p isone ’s
dilemma in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu non-commi men con lic i he
i m social conce n is su icien ly low. An inc ease in he i m social conce n changes he
pa adigm o he game by allowing o he eme gence o (C,C) as he unique Pa e o e icien
SPNE, so ha he CSR-CDG becomes an an i-p isone ’s dilemma in which sel -in e es
and mu ual bene i o ou pu commi men do no con lic .
We pinpoin ha choosing s a egically Co NC is no me e heo e ical specula ion.
Focusing on ne wo k indus ies, companies can make c edible announcemen s abou hei
p oduc ion le els. Fo ins ance, in Sep embe 2020, Wis on, one o he h ee Apple op
con ac manu ac u e s in India, which assembled abou 200,000 second-gene a ion iPhone
SEs pe mon h, announced a plan o scale p oduc ion up o 400,000 a mon h by he end o
ha yea (Reu e s, 2020). Mo eo e , e en i a company does no announce p ecise ou pu
le els, consume s (and i al i ms) can in e p oduc ion using as a p oxy he ( e y o en
eleased, as a simple sea ch on he websi es o , in e alias, eu e s.com, bloombe g.com,
.com, economis .com e eal) announcemen s conce ning he alue o in es men plans
ela ed o (1) new assembly lines a he old loca ion, o (2) new ac o ies.
The ich spec um o equilib ium esul s o e s many es able implica ions o econome-
icians. Fo example, i should be ound ha whe he i ms a e (1) sligh ly socially o ien ed
hey should publicly announce he ou pu o which hey aim a commi ing, and (2) highly
socially o ien ed hey should no commi o an announced ou pu le el when he ex en o
he ne wo k ex e nali y o p oduc s is small o hey should commi when he ex en o he
ne wo k ex e nali y o p oduc s is la ge.
Be o e p oceeding u he , i may be con enien o cla i y he logical iming o he e en s,
which ep esen s a heo e ical modelling syn hesis in a s a ic one-sho en i onmen o he
his o ical iming o he e en s o he CSR-CDG, which in u n a ec s he beha iou o
consume s and i ms. The logical s uc u e used in he p esen wo k esembles hose adop ed
by Choi & Lim (2022), desc ibing he CDG wi h p o i -maximising i ms ha compe e
simul aneously à la Cou no in he ma ke s age o he game. This is because he eade may
wonde whe he he s a egic use o ou pu commi men in a ne wo k indus y a ec s he
consume s’ expec a ions2and he na u e o he compe i ion in he ou pu ma ke .
Fi s , we pinpoin ha becoming a S ackelbe g leade is no necessa ily ela ed o playing
Co NC a he decision-making s age o he CDG, bu a he because one o he wo i ms
2The expec a ions o ma ion mechanisms ha e been ex ensi ely deba ed in he economic li e a u e. The
subjec is ex emely ele an in di e en kinds o dynamic models o ackle he issue o (exogenous o
endogenous) luc ua ions. This has been done, e.g., in cobweb models (Go i e al., 2015; Hommes, 1994), OLG
models (Fan i & Go i, 2013; Go i & Sodini, 2020,2021) o dynamic oligopolies (Bischi e al., 1998,1999). In
a con ex o a s a ic oligopoly, consume s’ expec a ions become ele an in ne wo k indus ies. In his ega d,
some ecen con ibu ions poin ed his ques ion ou o he a en ion, e.g., G i a & Ve as (2011), Suleymano a
&Wey(2012), Hagiu & Halabu da (2014), Toshimi su (2019,2021), Leppänen (2020), Nakamu a (2021).
123

Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
can o canno p oduce be o e he i al in he logical iming o e en s.3In he i s case,
i becomes he leade a he ma ke s age o he game, wi h he i al p oducing only a e
obse ing he i al’s ou pu . In he second case, i ms p oduce simul aneously, and each
i m is only able o expec he i al’s p oduc ion. The CSR-CDG can e en ually be played
sequen ially (S ackelbe g) o simul aneously (Cou no ) a he ma ke s age. The comple e
logical sequence o e en s in each o he wo cases is as ollows.
•Cou no compe i ion in he ma ke s age o he CDG. In he i s decision-making s age,
each i m chooses o c edibly commi o no o commi o an announced ou pu le el. This
is a bina y choice ha happens be o e consume s make hei pu chase decisions and hen
a ec s hei expec a ions abou he p e ailing ne wo k size. Consume s a e a ional and
ha e a ional expec a ions. I a leas one o he wo i ms is commi ing, he consume s’
expec a ions abou he p oduc ion o he commi ing i m(s) a e ealised immedia ely, i.e.,
a he same logical ime as he announcemen wi hou he need o know he p e ailing
equilib ium. I a leas one o he wo i ms is no commi ing, consume s’ expec a ions
become binding, and hey a e ealised in equilib ium as consume s a e a ional so ha hey
can know in ad ance (in he logical iming o he e en s) he p e ailing equilib ium alue
o he ou pu . This hold in an in e media e s age be ween he decision-making s age and
he ma ke s age. In he ma ke s age, compe i ion be ween i ms holds simul aneously,
i.e., each o hem maximises i s objec i e gi en he expec a ions abou he p oduc ion
o he i al. Indeed, acco ding o he Cou no ules, ma ke compe i ion in he his o ical
iming o he e en s can be ep esen ed by using a model in which i ms make p oduc ion
decisions simul aneously. In his case, each i m has expec a ions abou he p oduc ion o
he i al. These expec a ions will be ealised in equilib ium (i.e., when he ou pu eac ion
unc ion c oss each o he ). We pinpoin ha he non-commi men scena io is equi alen
o he case in which i ms a e commi ing bu hei announcemen is no c edible. In his
case, consume s beha e as i hey o med expec a ions be o e he commi men and hey
a e sel - ul illing, in u n, esponding o equilib ium quan i y. “Compa ed o he case o
commi men , his implies ha a low ou pu le el a ises in he ne wo k ma ke ” (Choi &
Lim, 2022, p. 665) when he ne wo k ex e nali y is posi i e.
•S ackelbe g compe i ion in he ma ke s age o he CDG. The iming o he e en s o
he i ms’ beha iou in he i s decision-making s age and he consume s’ beha iou
exac ly eplica e hose de ailed in he p e ious poin . In he ma ke s age, compe i ion
be ween i ms holds sequen ially (ins ead o simul aneously), i.e., one i m mo es i s
and becomes he leade ; he i al chooses i s p oduc ion a e obse ing he p oduc ion
o he leade and hen becomes he ollowe . The leade conside s he ou pu eac ion
unc ion o he ollowe . Indeed, acco ding o he S ackelbe g ules, ma ke compe i ion
in he his o ical iming o he e en s can be ep esen ed by using a model in which i ms
make p oduc ion decisions sequen ially, bu he choice abou ou pu commi men does no
a ec he kind o compe i ion in he ou pu ma ke . This implies ha he commi ing i m
can be he leade o he ollowe . The s uc u e o he ou sub-games o he CSR CDR à la
S ackelbe g (which is epo ed in he appendix) is he ollowing: i bo h i ms a e ( esp. a e
no ) commi ing, he leade chooses o commi ( esp. no o commi ) be o e he ollowe .
3An anonymous e iewe pinpoin s some doub s on he ac i m ipublicly announces i s quan i y, bu he
i al, i m j, seems igno ing his in o ma ion, and hen sugges s conside ing S ackelbe g compe i ion when
only one i m is unila e ally commi ing ( he C- i m is he leade and he NC- i m is he ollowe ). In he las
sec ion o he Appendix, we explain he easons why we belie e ha bo h app oaches a e logically consis en
and de elop he CSR CDG by conside ing S ackelbe g compe i ion in he asymme ic sub-games C/NC and
NC/C. Rema kably, also unde his assump ion he SPNE solu ions o he game a e quali a i ely simila .
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
I he leade is commi ing and he ollowe does no , he leade chooses o play Cbe o e
he ollowe makes p oduc ion decisions by playing NC. I he leade is no commi ing
and he ollowe is commi ing, he leade chooses o play NC be o e he ollowe makes
p oduc ion decisions by playing C.
The a icle p oceeds as ollows. Sec ion 2p esen s he basic elemen s o he non-
coope a i e CSR-CDG based on Cou no i al y. Sec ion 3( esp. 4) s udies he endogenous
ma ke con igu a ion eme ging in his en i onmen by conside ing p o i s ( he i m’s u il-
i y) as he main decision a iable in he decision-making s age. Sec ion 5ou lines he main
conclusions. The Appendix shows (i) he mic oeconomic ounda ions o he ma ke demand
unde Cand NC, (ii) some analy ical de ails o he model p esen ed in he main ex , (iii) he
CSR-CDG in which he s a egic in e ac ion, in he ma ke s age o he game, be ween he
wo i ms occu s sequen ially (S ackelbe g) ins ead o simul aneously (Cou no ) by assuming
ha i m iis always he leade , (i ) he CSR-CDG à la Cou no -S ackelbe g in which he
commi ing i m is always he leade , and ( ) a compa ison be ween Cou no and S ackelbe g
scena ios showing, depending on he pa ame ic se , ha bo h kinds o compe i ion se ings
can eme ge endogenously.
2Themodel
Conside a Cou no duopoly in which i ms p oduce homogeneous ne wo k goods (Ka z &
Shapi o, 1985). The ne wo k e ec (consump ion ex e nali y) can be posi i e (e.g., mobile
communica ions, so wa e, in e ne - ela ed ac i i ies, online social ne wo ks, ashion, e c.)
o nega i e (e.g., a ic conges ion o ne wo k conges ion o e limi ed bandwid h). Unde a
posi i e ( esp. nega i e) ex e nali y an inc easing numbe o use s inc eases ( esp. educes)
he indi idual u ili y and he alue o he goods o each consume , in u n, causing he so-
called bandwagon ( esp. snob) e ec . As in Ka z & Shapi o (1985), he e exis wo pola
cases: (1) i ms can commi c edibly hemsel es o an announced ou pu le el, gi en he
ne wo k size, be o e consume s maximise hei u ili ies (C); (2) i ms canno (a e unable o)
commi hemsel es o a gi en ou pu le el, so ha consume s o m hei expec a ions on o al
sales, which a e ul illed in equilib ium acco ding o he a ional expec a ions hypo hesis
(NC). These wo al e na i es ha e been aken exogenously in Ka z & Shapi o (1985)and
endogeneised by Choi & Lim (2022), who build on he non-coope a i e CDG wi h comple e
in o ma ion p o i -maximising i ms.
The main aim o he p esen a icle is o add he decision-making s age o a Cou no
duopoly à la Ka z & Shapi o (1985) and ollows Choi & Lim (2022) by assuming socially
o ien ed, ins ead o p o i -maximising, i ms, in line wi h he aim o mode n i ms amed in
s a egic compe i i e ma ke s (as clea ly epo ed by McKinsey, 2019, and discussed in he
in oduc ion), and building on he non-coope a i e CSR-CDG.
The mic oeconomic ounda ions o he (linea ) ma ke demand wi h ne wo k ex e nali y
and ull p oduc compa ibili y ollow he ecen a icle by Buccella e al. (2022a), p o iding
de ails ( epo ed in he appendix) o how he commi men scena io and he non-commi ing
scena io a ec he demand o consume s o he p oduc o ne wo k i.
Unde he al e na i e C o bo h i ms, he (no malised) in e se ma ke demand o i m i
is:
pC/C
i=1−qi−qj+n(qi+qj)(1)
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
whe e pC/C
iis he ma ginal willingness o pay owa ds p oduc s o ne wo k i(i,j={1,2},
i= j) unde ou pu commi men , qideno es he quan i y o he goods p oduced by i m i
and n∈(−1,1)is he s eng h o he ne wo k e ec ( he highe he absolu e alue o n, he
s onge he e ec o he ne wo k). Posi i e ( esp. nega i e) alues o n e e s o he case o
posi i e ( esp. nega i e) ne wo k goods.
Unde he al e na i e NC o bo h i ms, he in e se demand unc ions (see, e.g., Hoe nig,
2012; Chi co & Sc imi o e, 2013; Bha acha jee & Pal, 2014; Fan i & Buccella, 2016;Buc-
cella e al., 2022a) a e as ollows:
pNC/NC
i=1−qi−qj+n(yi+yj)(2)
whe e yi(i,j={1,2},i= j) deno es he consume s’ expec a ions abou he equilib ium
ou pu p oduced by i m i,andpNC/NC
iis he ma ginal willingness o pay owa ds p oduc s
o ne wo k iunde ou pu non-commi men .4
The gene ic i m i’s p o i unc ion is gi en by:
i=(pi−w)qi(3)
whe e 0 ≤w<1 is he cons an a e age and ma ginal cos (i.e., he echnology has cons an
e u ns o scale), which is se o ze o o analy ical ac abili y and wi hou loss o gene ali y.
The e o e, he p o i unc ions in he symme ic scena ios C/Cand NC/NC ead espec-
i ely as ollows5:
C/C
i=[1−qi−qj+n(qi+qj)]qi(4)
and
NC/NC
i=[1−qi−qj+n(yi+yj)]qi(5)
Following ecen ly es ablished li e a u e (e.g., Goe ing, 2007,2008;Lambe ini&
Tampie i, 2010,2015; Kopel & B and, 2012;Kopele al.,2014; Lambe ini e al., 2016;
Fan i & Buccella, 2017,2018; Kopel & Laman ia, 2018; Plane -F ied ich & Sahm, 2020),6
we assume ha he social conce ns can be in e p e ed as pa o he consume su plus (CS).
This, in u n, implies ha he ea u e o a CSR i m is o be sensi i e owa ds CS. The e o e,
each i m aims a maximising a weigh ed sum o p o i s ( ha acc ue o i s owne s) and he
consume su plus ( ha acc ues o i s s akeholde s). Mo e o mally, we de ine bas he pe cen -
age o he consume su plus cap u ed by he s akeholde s. I he s akeholde s ully cap u e
he su plus, hen b=1. I none o he consume su plus acc ues o he s akeholde s, hen
b=0 and he i m’s objec i e boils down o p o i maximisa ion. The inclusion o a ac ion
o he wel a e o consume s can also be hough o as being pa o he i m’s social conce n
o ca e o consume ou comes. Then, each i m aims a weigh ing he consume su plus
wi h b∈(0,1), which is he gene al case. This pa ame e can be exogenous o endogenous.
4Fo he sake o comple eness, we epo he demand o he p oduc o ne wo k iin he asymme ic scena io
in which only one i m, say i m i, c edibly commi s i sel o an announced ou pu le el and he i al, say i m j,
doesno (de ailsa e epo edin heappendix).Thisisgi enby heexp ession pC/NC
i=1−qi−qj+n(qi+yj).
This is done by assuming ha consume s a e homogeneous and he C- i m neglec s he in luence on NC- i m’s
consume s.
5The p o i unc ions o he commi ing i m iand he non-commi ing i m jin he asymme ic scena io
C/NC a e espec i ely gi en by he ollowing exp essions C/NC
i=[1−qi−qj+n(qi+yj)]qiand
C/NC
j=[1−qi−qj+n(qi+yj)]qj.
6On he empi ical side, see Siegel & Vi aliano (2007) and Fe nández-K anz & San aló (2010), who p o ide
some empi ical indings abou CSR.
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
Bo h cases ha e been analysed in he li e a u e (Fan i & Buccella, 2017; Plane -F ied ich &
Sahm, 2020) especially in models dealing wi h CSR decision games ha con as he bina y
choice CSR e sus p o i maximisa ion (PM). Howe e , his is no he main aim o he p esen
a icle as all he i ms a e CSR-o ien ed and mus choose o play Co NC ( he commi men
decision game). In his wo k, he e o e, we assume ha pa ame e bis aken exogenously by
each i m.
The CSR-o ien ed i m i’s objec i e (u ili y) unc ion Uimay be speci ied as a simple
pa ame e ised combina ion o p o i s and consume su plus, and i is gi en by:
UC/C
i=C/C
i+bCSC/C(6)
i bo h i ms c edibly commi hemsel es o an announced ou pu le el, and
UNC/NC
i=NC/NC
i+bCSNC/NC (7)
i bo h i ms do no commi hemsel es o an announced ou pu le el, whe e.7
CSC/C=1
2(1−n)(qi+qj)2(8)
and
CSNC/NC =1
2(qi+qj)[qi+qj−n(yi+yj)](9)
In he i s (decision) s age o his non-coope a i e game wi h comple e in o ma ion, each
i m chooses o commi o no o commi hemsel es o an announced ou pu le el. This
ep esen s a s anda d bina y choice, which can be based ei he on p o i s (i he decision
is owne s-o ien ed) o on he i m’s u ili y (i he decision is s akeholde s-o ien ed). Bo h
objec i es can be jus i ied bu ollow a di e en na a i e. The a ionale o conside p o i s
as he main decision a iable in he i s decision-making s age implies, ollowing B and and
G o he (2015), ha i ms aims a emaining ope a i e in he ma ke o e ime so ha hei
p o i s mus be non-nega i e (see also F iedman, 1970, who poin ed ou ha he maximisa ion
o p o i s o sha eholde s is he only social esponsibili y o businesses).
The a ionale o conside a b oade objec i e (i.e., he i m’s u ili y) as a s a egic a iable
is mo e in line wi h he main goal o a s akeholde s-o ien ed i m and ollows, e.g., Buccella
e al. (2022b). In his ega d, Kopel e al., (2014, p. 397) p o ide a nice in e p e a ion o jus i y
he s a egic use o he i m’s u ili y: a combined objec i e o p o i s and weigh ed consume
su plus aims a cap u ing “a i m ype e e ed o as sync e ic s ewa dship model…, e e ing
o an o ganiza ion which emb aces economic as well as non-economic goals. Likewise, we
can hink o a hyb id o ganiza ional s uc u e, which enables he i m o pu sue p o i and
non-p o i mo i es”.
In he second (ma ke ) s age, each i m compe es à la Cou no in he p oduc ma ke and
hen chooses he quan i y o maximise he i m’s u ili y U.
2.1 Fi ms commi hemsel es o an announced ou pu le el
Conside he symme ic sub-game in which bo h i ms commi hemsel es o an announced
ou pu le el (C/C). Gi en he CSR i m’s objec i e and hen conside ing he exp essions in
7In he asymme ic scena io C/NC, i mi’s and i m j’s objec i es a e espec i ely gi en by UC/NC
i=
C/NC
i+bCSC/NC and UC/NC
j=C/NC
j+bCSC/NC, whe e he consume su plus CSC/NC =
1
2(qi+qj)[qi+qj−n(qi+yj)].
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
unique Pa e o ine icien SPNE and he CSR-CDG is a p isone ’s dilemma o any
nA(b)<n<nC(b), in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu commi men
con lic ; (2.4) (C,C)is he unique Pa e o e icien SPNE and he CSR-CDG is an
an i-p isone ’s dilemma (deadlock) o any nC(b)<n<1, in which sel -in e es and
mu ual bene i o ou pu commi men do no con lic .
[3] I 0.313 <b<0.393 hen (3.1) (NC,NC)is he unique Pa e o e icien SPNE
and he CSR-CDG is an an i-p isone ’s dilemma (deadlock) o any 0 ≤n<nA(b),
in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu non-commi men do no con lic ;
(3.2) (C,NC)and (NC,C)a e wo asymme ic SPNE, and he CSR-CDG is an an i-
coo dina ion game o any nA(b)<n<nB(b); (3.3) (C,C)is he unique Pa e o
ine icien SPNE and he CSR-CDG is a p isone ’s dilemma o any nB(b)<n<
nC(b), in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu commi men con lic ; (3.4)
(C,C)is he unique Pa e o e icien SPNE and he CSR-CDG is an an i-p isone ’s
dilemma (deadlock) o any nC(b)<n<1, in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i
o ou pu commi men do no con lic .
[4] I 0.393 <b<0.4013 hen (4.1) (NC,NC)is he unique Pa e o e icien SPNE
and he CSR-CDG is an an i-p isone ’s dilemma (deadlock) o any 0 ≤n<nA(b),
in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu non-commi men do no con lic ;
(4.2) (C,NC)and (NC,C)a e wo asymme ic SPNE, and he CSR-CDG is an an i-
coo dina ion game o any nA(b)<n<nB(b); (4.3) (C,C)is he unique Pa e o
e icien SPNE and he CSR-CDG is an an i-p isone ’s dilemma (deadlock) o any
nB(b)<n<1, in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu commi men do
no con lic .
[5] I 0.4013 <b<0.5 hen (5.1) (NC,NC)is he unique Pa e o e icien SPNE and
he CSR-CDG is an an i-p isone ’s dilemma (deadlock) o any 0 ≤n<nA(b),
in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu non-commi men do no con lic ;
(5.2) (C,NC)and (NC,C)a e wo asymme ic SPNE, and he CSR-CDG is an an i-
coo dina ion game o any nA(b)<n<1.
Le nbe nega i e.
[6] I 0 ≤b<0.115 hen (NC,NC)is he unique Pa e o ine icien SPNE and he CSR-
CDG is a p isone ’s dilemma o any 0 >n>−1, in which sel -in e es and mu ual
bene i o ou pu non-commi men con lic .
[7] I 0.115 <b<0.168 hen (7.1) (NC,NC)is he unique Pa e o ine icien SPNE and
he CSR-CDG is a p isone ’s dilemma o any 0 >n>−nB(b), in which sel -in e es
and mu ual bene i o ou pu non-commi men con lic ; (7.2) (C,C)and(NC,NC)a e
wo symme ic SPNE (Cpayo domina es NC) and he CSR-CDG is a coo dina ion
game o any −nB(b)>n>−1.
[8] I 0.168 <b<0.219 hen (8.1) (NC,NC)is he unique Pa e o ine icien SPNE
and he CSR-CDG is a p isone ’s dilemma o any 0 >n>−nB(b),inwhich
sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu non-commi men con lic ; (8.2) (C,C)and
(NC,NC)a e wo symme ic SPNE (Cpayo domina es NC) and he CSR-CDG is a
coo dina ion game o any −nB(b)>n>−nA(b); (8.3) (C,C)is he unique Pa e o
e icien SPNE and he CSR-CDG is an an i-p isone ’s dilemma (deadlock) o any
−nA(b)>n>−1, in which sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu commi men
do no con lic .
[9] I 0.219 <b<0.333 hen (C,C)is he unique Pa e o e icien SPNE and he CSR-
CDG is an an i-p isone ’s dilemma (deadlock) o any 0 >n>−1, in which sel -
in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu commi men do no con lic .
123

Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
[10] I 0.333 <b<bNC/NC
T(n) hen (C,C)is he unique Pa e o e icien SPNE and he
CSR-CDG is an an i-p isone ’s dilemma (deadlock) o any 0 >n>−1−2b
b,inwhich
sel -in e es and mu ual bene i o ou pu commi men do no con lic .
P oo . Appendix.
The economic in ui ion behind he esul s o P oposi ion 1 is simple and p oceeds ollowing
he s anda d mechanism o p ice/quan i y on he i m’s p o i . The esul s a e d i en by he
in e ac ion be ween he ne wo k size and he deg ee o he i m’s social conce n (Fig. 1).
I i ms a e p o i -maximising en i ies (b=0), he model eplica es he ou comes o Choi
&Lim(2022), in which he commi men scena io eme ges when he ne wo k ex e nali y is
posi i e (commi ing o an announced ou pu le el is a ou ed by he bandwagon e ec o he
posi i e ne wo k ex e nali ies), and he no-commi men scena io eme ges when he ne wo k
ex e nali y is nega i e (no commi ing o an announced ou pu le el is a ou ed by he snob
e ec o he nega i e ne wo k ex e nali ies).
Unlike his case, i i ms a e CSR-o ien ed and he ne wo k ex e nali y is posi i e, an
inc ease in he deg ee o social conce n sha ply changes he SPNE and hen he wel a e
ou comes (Fig. 2, Panels A-B), wo king ou a ou ing (i) he no commi men scena io (which
is Pa e o e icien o i ms bu no consume s o ien ed) i he ex en o he ne wo k ex e nali y
is ela i ely small, (ii) he mixed scena io, in which only i m aims a commi ing o an
announced ou pu le el, bu he i al does no i he ex en o he ne wo k ex e nali y becomes
la ge . This ou come also leads o he highes social wel a e, al hough i does no ep esen
Fig. 1 The CSR-CDG: SPNE when nand b a y and he i m’s p o i is he decision a iable. The sand-colou ed
egion ep esen he un easible pa ame e space, which is bounded by he h eshold b<1
2−n:= bNC/NC
T(n).
The easibili y condi ion mus be sa is ied o gua an ee posi i e p o i s in he sub-game NC/NC. Yellow
egion: (C,C)and (NC,NC)a e wo symme ic SPNE (NC payo domina es C) and he CSR-CDG is a
coo dina ion game. G een egion: (C,C)and (NC,NC)a e wo symme ic SPNE (Cpayo domina es NC)
and he CSR-CDG is a coo dina ion game. Ligh -blue egion: (C,NC)and (NC,C)a e wo asymme ic
SPNE wi h he C- i m ge ing he bes ou come and he CSR-CDG is an an i-coo dina ion game. This acco ds
wi h he egion below, in which he CSR-CDG is an an i-coo dina ion game and C- i m con inues o ge he
bes ou come
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
Fig. 2 Equilib ium social wel a e as a unc ion o b. The black ( esp. ed) [ esp. blue] cu e e e s o he case
C/C( esp. NC/NC) [ esp. C/NC]. The solid lines ep esen he social wel a e p e ailing a he SPNE.
The dash-do ed lines ep esen s he social wel a e le el ha can eme ging when he e is inde e minacy, i.e., a
mul iplici y o SPNE in pu e s a egies and he CSR-CDG is a coo dina ion game. The do ed lines a e ic i ious
and a e d awn only o compa ison pu poses. Panel A: n=0.8; Panel B: n=0.4; Panel C: n=−0.8
a win–win solu ion om a socie al pe spec i e as consume s would be be e o by unde
C/C. The ex en o social conce n, he e o e, a ou s he eme gence o he no-commi men
scena io. This is because an inc ease in binc eases he p oduc ion o he i ms in all he
s a egic p o iles, bu he pe cen age inc ease in he ou pu o he C- i ms is la ge han he
pe cen age inc ease in he ou pu o he NC- i ms. The e o e, he p o i s o he C- i m educe
mo e han he p o i s o he NC- i m and his, in u n, ends o le NC become he dominan
s a egy i he ne wo k ex e nali y is no oola ge. When he ex en o he ex e nali y becomes
la ge he e ec s o an inc ease in ba e di e en . Fi s , he e is a s anda d posi i e e ec
o p oduc ion in all he s a egic p o iles and his, in u n, educes he co esponding ma ke
p ice. Howe e , he pe cen age inc ease in ou pu o he C- i m is la ge han he pe cen age
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
inc easeinou pu o he NC- i m.Inaddi ion, he educ ionin hema ke p icewhen i msa e
commi ing is la ge han when i ms a e no commi ing. This, in u n, leads o a educ ion in
p o i sunde Candaninc easeinp o i sunde NCwi h heeme genceo anan i-coo dina ion
game, in which each i m plays he opposi e s a egy o he i al in equilib ium.
Things change unde nega i e ne wo k ex e nali ies (Figs. 1and 2, Panel C). In his case,
an inc ease in he ex en o he social conce n wo ks ou in he di ec ion o inc easing he
impo ance o he snob e ec , so ha an inc ease in he (absolu e alue o ) s eng h o he
ne wo k ex e nali y ends o shi inwa ds he ma ke demand a he highes in ensi y. This
has nega i e e ec s on p o i s in e e y s a egic p o ile. Howe e , he educ ion in ou pu
expe ienced unde Cis la ge han unde NC le ing he no-commi men scena io become
he dominan s a egy. Howe e , as i ms unde NC p oduce mo e (and sell a a lowe p ice)
han unde C he e is a join incen i e o de ia e owa ds he commi men scena io, bu no
one has he unila e al incen i e o comply wi h he (non-coope a i e) ag eemen , so each
i m is en apped in he po e y ap o do no commi o an announced ou pu le el. As he
NC- i m p oduces mo e han he C- i m when nis nega i e, an inc ease in he ex en o b
has exac ly he opposi e e ec s as hose desc ibed abo e so ha he educ ion in p o i s o he
NC- i m is la ge han he educ ion in p o i s o he C- i m and Cbecomes he dominan
s a egy o la ge alues o b. As consume s a e now always be e o unde NC he e a e
no win–win solu ions also in his case.
The policy ecipes a e pe haps qui e a icula ed ( he e a e no win–win si ua ions, in which
bo h consume s and i ms a e be e o ) and coun e in ui i e. I he ne wo k ex e nali y
is posi i e, inc easing he impo ance o he social conce n a ou s he eme gence o no-
commi men scena io, which is de imen al o consume s and social wel a e. The e o e, i
he ex en o he ne wo k ex e nali y is ela i ely high, he public au ho i y should no a ou
he eme gence o a c edible commi men o all he i ms as he bes ou come a he socie al
le el is a si ua ion in which one i m commi s o an announced ou pu le el, bu he i al
does no ( hough consume s would be be e o unde he ull commi men scena io), and
he ex en o he social conce n should be se an in e media e le el; i he ex en o he
ne wo k ex e nali y is ela i ely low, he public au ho i y should a ou he eme gence o
a c edible commi men o all he i ms ( hough he socie y would be be e o unde he
mixed scena io), bu inc easing he impo ance o he social conce n is de imen al o i ms.
I he ne wo k ex e nali y is nega i e, inc easing he impo ance o he social conce n a ou s
he eme gence o he commi men scena io, which is de imen al o consume s and social
wel a e as socie y would be be e o unde no commi men . The e o e, he ex en o he
social conce n should be se a an in e media e le el.
3.2 S akeholde s’u ili y as he decision a iable in he i s decision-making s age
o he CSR-CDG
Unlike Sec . 3.1, his sec ion examines he i s s age o he game by assuming ha he choice
o commi o no commi is s akeholde -o ien ed and hen he i m’s u ili y ep esen s he
decision a iable. In his ega d, Table 2summa ises he payo ma ix wi h he i m’s u ili y
unc ions in he symme ic and asymme ic sub-games (see Eqs. (14), (21), (35)and(36)).
To de i e all he possible equilib ia o he game one mus s udy he sign o he i m’s
u ili y di e en ials o i={1,2},i= j, ha is:
UA(n,b):= U∗C/NC
i(n,b)−U∗NC/NC
i(n,b)(44)
UB(n,b):= U∗NC/C
i(n,b)−U∗C/C
i(n,b)(45)
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
Table 2 The CSR-CDG à la Cou no (payo ma ix). Fi m’s u ili y
Fi m j→CNC
Fi m i↓
CU
∗C/C
i(n,b), U∗C/C
j(n,b)U∗C/NC
i(n,b), U∗C/NC
j(n,b)
NC U∗NC/C
i(n,b), U∗NC/C
j(n,b)U∗NC/NC
i(n,b), U∗NC/NC
j(n,b)
and
UC(n,b):= U∗NC/NC
i(n,b)−U∗C/C
i(n,b)(46)
F om (44), he sign o UA(n,b)is posi i e ( esp. nega i e) i n>nU
A(b)( esp. n<
nU
A(b),whe enU
A(b)is he h eshold alue o he ex en o he ne wo k ex e nali y (as a
unc ion o he ex en o he i m’s social conce n) such ha UA(n,b)=0. We do no
epo he alue o nU
A(b)as i is analy ically cumbe some and no in o ma i e.
F om (45), he sign o UB(n,b)is nega i e ( esp. posi i e) i n>nU
B(b)( esp. n<
nU
B(b),whe e
nU
B(b):= (3−2b)(1−2b)
b2−b−1(47)
is he h eshold alue o he ex en o he ne wo k ex e nali y (as a unc ion o he ex en o
he i m’s social conce n) such ha UB(n,b)=0.
F om (46), he sign o UC(n,b)is nega i e ( esp. posi i e) i n>nU
C(b)( esp. n<
nU
C(b),whe e
nU
C(b):= (1+2b)(3−2b)
4−b(9−4b)(48)
is he h eshold alue o he ex en o he ne wo k ex e nali y (as a unc ion o he ex en o
he i m’s social conce n) such ha UC(n,b)=0.
To a oid leng hening he a icle u he we do no w i e an explici p oposi ion o de ail
he SPNE ou comes and he endogenous ma ke s uc u e o he CSR-CDG eme ging when
he i m’s u ili y is he decision a iable. Howe e , wi hou loss o gene ali y, esul s a e
epo ed Fig. 3, which esembles Fig. 1abo e. I is in e es ing o obse e ha , as expec ed,
when he ne wo k ex e nali y is posi i e and he decision is s akeholde -o ien ed in he i s
s age o he CSR-CDG, p oduc ion weigh s mo e in he i m’s objec i e han when p o i is
he decision a iable, and his a ou he eme gence o he commi men scena io i espec i e
o he le el o he social conce n, in sha p con as wi h he p e ious case. This “opposi e
ou come” is also obse ed when he ne wo k ex e nali y is nega i e. In his case, in ac , he
no-commi men scena io eme ges o a wide pa ame e con igu a ion han when p o i is he
decision a iable. This is because, in his case, p oduc ion is highe unde no commi men
han unde commi men .
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
Fig. 3 TheCSR-CDG: SPNEwhen nandb a yand he i m’su ili y is hedecision a iable.Thesand-colou ed
egion ep esen he un easible pa ame e space, which is bounded by he h eshold b<1
2−n:= bNC/NC
T(n).
The easibili ycondi ionmus be sa is ied o gua an ee posi i ep o i sin he sub-game NC/NC. G een egion:
(C,C)and(NC,NC)a e wo symme ic SPNE (Cpayo domina es NC) and he CSR-CDG is a coo dina ion
game. Ligh -blue egion: (C,NC)and (NC,C)a e wo asymme ic SPNE wi h he NC- i m ge ing he bes
ou come and he CSR-CDG is an an i-coo dina ion game
4 Conclusions
The inc easingly apid sp ead o ne wo k goods, which is making consump ion ex e nali ies
a majo issue, and Co po a e Social Responsibili y, which is making socially o ien ed i ms
mo e and mo e impo an in he ma ke , is becoming a s ylised ac especially in s a egic
compe i i e con ex s.
Unde ne wo k consump ion ex e nali ies, consume s mus ei he o m ( a ional) expec-
a ions o know he in o ma ion disclosed by he i ms abou he size o compe ing ne wo ks.
This a icle aimed a di ec ly ex ending Ka z & Shapi o (1985) and Choi & Lim (2022)
by conside ing CSR ins ead o p o i -maximising i ms. In doing his, i endogeneised he
choice o c edibly commi o an announced ou pu le el, gi en he ne wo k size, be o e con-
sume s make hei pu chasing decisions. The a icle hen conside s ou pu commi men as
a s a egic de ice ha depends on he ex en o he ne wo k size and he deg ee o i ms’
social conce n cap u ing he impo ance o consume wel a e in p oduc ion. Unlike Choi &
Lim (2022), who s udy he non-coope a i e, mul i-s age, commi men decision game wi h
p o i -maximising i ms, he p esen wo k conside s he non-coope a i e, mul i-s age, CSR
commi men decision game.
Ou non-coope a i e game allows us o obse e se e al equilib ium scena ios, in sha p
con as o Choi & Lim (2022), anging om he p isone ’s dilemma o he an i-p isone ’s
dilemma (deadlock), passing h ough he an i-coo dina ion game and o e s some es able
implica ions o econome icians abou he ma ke con igu a ion ha can ha e ele an wel a e
e ec s, which a e d i en by he ex en o he i m’s social conce n.
123

Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
The p esen wo k belongs o an eme ging indus ial o ganiza ion li e a u e (e.g., G i a &
Ve as, 2011; Hagiu & Halabu da, 2014; Leppänen, 2020; Nakamu a, 2021; Suleymano a &
Wey, 2012;Toshimi su,2019,2021)on heconsume s’expec a ionsandne wo kex e nali ies
andmaybeex endedinsomedi ec ions, o ins ance byadding R&Din es men s,manage ial
delega ion, unions and so on.
Acknowledgemen s Theau ho sacknowledge woanonymous e iewe so hejou nal o aluablecommen s
on an ea lie d a o he manusc ip . Luca Go i acknowledges inancial suppo om he Uni e si y o Pisa
unde he “PRA – P oge i di Rice ca di A eneo” (Ins i u ional Resea ch G an s) – P ojec No. PRA_2020_64
“In ec ious diseases, heal h and de elopmen : economic and legal e ec s”. Mau o Sodini acknowledges inan-
cialsuppo om heCzechScienceFounda ion(GACR)unde p ojec 23-06282S,andanSGS esea chp ojec
o VŠBTUO (SP2023/19). The usual disclaime applies. This s udy was conduc ed when Domenico Buccella
was a isi ing schola a he Depa men o Law o he Uni e si y o Pisa.
Funding Openaccess undingp o idedbyUni e si àdiPisawi hin he CRUI-CARE Ag eemen .Theau ho s
decla e ha his s udy was unded by he Uni e si y o Pisa and he Technical Uni e si y o Os a a.
Decla a ions
Con lic o in e es The au ho s decla e ha hey ha e no con lic o in e es .
Open Access This a icle is licensed unde a C ea i e Commons A ibu ion 4.0 In e na ional License, which
pe mi s use, sha ing, adap a ion, dis ibu ion and ep oduc ion in any medium o o ma , as long as you gi e
app op ia e c edi o he o iginal au ho (s) and he sou ce, p o ide a link o he C ea i e Commons licence,
and indica e i changes we e made. The images o o he hi d pa y ma e ial in his a icle a e included in he
a icle’s C ea i e Commons licence, unless indica ed o he wise in a c edi line o he ma e ial. I ma e ial is
no included in he a icle’s C ea i e Commons licence and you in ended use is no pe mi ed by s a u o y
egula ion o exceeds he pe mi ed use, you will need o ob ain pe mission di ec ly om he copy igh holde .
To iew a copy o his licence, isi h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/.
Appendix
The mic oeconomic ounda ions o he ma ke demand
when bo h i ms do no commi hemsel es o an announced ou pu
le el
This sec ion b ie ly p esen s he mic oeconomic ounda ions o he ma ke demand epo ed
in Eq. (2) in he main ex . I ackles his issue by conside ing i ms ha do no commi
hemsel es o an announced ou pu le el be o e consume s make hei pu chase decisions.
This ollows he mechanism de ailed by Ka z & Shapi o (1985) in he model p esen ed in
he main body o he ex o hei con ibu ion wi h consume s ha ing a ional expec a ions.
On he supply side, he economy is bi-sec o ial wi h a compe i i e sec o p oducing he
nume ai e good mand a duopolis ic indus y in which i m iand i m j(i={1,2};i= j)
p oduce ne wo k goods o a ie y (ne wo k) iand a ie y (ne wo k) j, espec i ely. These
goods a e pe cei ed as homogeneous by cus ome s.
On hedemand side, he e a e iden ical consume s wi h p e e ences desc ibed by he u ili y
unc ion V=Z+m, which is linea in he nume ai e good m. The u ili y Vis maximised
subjec o he budge cons ain piqi+pjqj+m=R,whe eZis a wice con inuously
di e en iable unc ion, qiand qja e he con ol a iables o he p oblem, piand pj ep esen
he p ice o (i.e., he ma ginal willingness o pay o he ep esen a i e consume o ) p oduc
o a ie y iand a ie y j, espec i ely, and Ris he consume ’s exogenous nominal income.
This income is high enough o a oid he exis ence o income e ec s on he demand o qiand
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
qj(i.e., he goods en e non-linea ly in V). In his ega d, in ac , he u ili y unc ion Vis
quasi-linea in mso ha all he ela ed p ope ies abou he demand o mand ha o qiand
qjhold (Ami e al., 2017; Choné & Linneme , 2020).
Di e en om he adi ional IO li e a u e, we assume he exis ence o ne wo k ex e nali-
iesinconsump ion,i.e.,onepe son’sdemandalsodependson hedemando o he cus ome s.
In his ega d, yi ep esen s an ex e nal e ec deno ing he consume s’ expec a ions abou
i m i’s equilib ium o al sales.
The simple mechanism o ne wo k e ec s desc ibed so a ollows Ka z & Shapi o (1985)
and esembles se e al ecen a icles belonging o he IO li e a u e amed in s a egic com-
pe i i e ma ke s using wi h linea ma ke demand (Buccella e al., 2022a,2022b;Chi co&
Sc imi o e, 2013; Choi & Lim, 2022;Hoe nig,2012; Naska & Pal, 2020;Sh i as a ,2021;
Song & Wang, 2017).
The unc ion Z ollows he speci ica ion o a quad a ic u ili y8:
Z=qi+qj−1
2(q2
i+q2
j+2qiqj)
+n[qi(yi+yj)+qj(yj+yi)]−n
2(y2
i+y2
j+2yiyj)(A.1)
whe e −1<n<1 is he s eng h o he ne wo k e ec (n=0 ep esen s he s anda d case
o non-ne wo k goods). Posi i e ( esp. nega i e) alues o n e lec a posi i e ( esp. nega i e)
consump ion ex e nali y. Though se e al ne wo k indus ies exhibi posi i e ex e nali ies
(mobile communica ions, so wa e, in e ne - ela ed ac i i ies, online social ne wo ks, ash-
ion, e c.), as a g ea e numbe o use s con ibu e o inc ease he alue o he p oduc o each
consume ( he e exis s a posi i e eedback loop i he ne wo k becomes mo e aluable), one
may hink abou eal-wo ld indus ies ha exhibi bo h kinds o ex e nali ies. In his ega d,
he au omobile indus y is wo h o be men ioned. This indus y migh also show nega i e
consump ion ex e nali ies as he mo e ca s a e sold, he g ea e he a ic conges ion, pa king
di icul ies and o he ela ed issues a e. The e o e, a nega i e ne wo k ex e nali y implies ha
an inc easing numbe o use s educes he alue o he goods o each consume ( o ins ance,
a ic conges ion o ne wo k conges ion o e limi ed bandwid h). The e m yi+yj ep esen s
he expec ed e ec i e ne wo k size o i m i’s consume s and o i m j’s consume s.
The solu ion o he maximisa ion p oblem o he su plus by he ep esen a i e consume
ollowing Ami e al. (2017) and Choné & Linneme (2020) gi es he ollowing linea in e se
demand o p oduc o ne wo k i:
pNC/NC
i=1−qi−qj+n(yi+yj)(A2)
8The ne wo k ex e nali y e ec in he u ili y unc ion Eq. (A.1) can mo e gene ally be w i en as n[qi(yi+
kiyj)+qj(yj+kjyi)]−n
2[y2
i+y2
j+(ki+kj)yiyj], whe e he pa ame e ki∈[0,1]measu es he deg ee o
compa ibili y o he ne wo k o p oduc j owa ds he ne wo k o p oduc i. Pai wise, he pa ame e kj∈[0,1]
measu es he deg ee o compa ibili y o he ne wo k o p oduc iwi h he ne wo k o p oduc j. Conside ing he
case o common compa ibili y ki=kj=k, he ne wo k ex e nali y e m becomes n[qi(yi+kyj)+qj(yj+
kyi)]−n
2(y2
i+y2
j+2kyiyj), which can be u he simpli ied by assuming ull compa ibili y be ween he
p oduc s o he wo ne wo ks, i.e., ki=kj=1, so ha n[qi(yi+yj)+qj(yj+yi)]−n
2(y2
i+y2
j+2yiyj).
I he deg ee o compa ibili y be ween he p oduc s o he wo ne wo ks was ze o, i.e., ki=kj=0, we would
ha e n(qiyi+qjyi)−n
2(y2
i+y2
j).
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
The mic oeconomic ounda ions o he ma ke demand
when bo h i ms commi hemsel es o an announced ou pu le el
This sec ion conside s he opposi e si ua ion in which bo h i ms c edibly commi hemsel es
oan announced ou pu le elbe o e consume s make hei pu chase decision. This ollows he
mechanism de ailed by Ka z & Shapi o (1985) in an ad hoc appendix o hei con ibu ion.
In his si ua ion, consume s know he quan i y ha will be p oduced by ha bo h i ms
( he consume s’ expec a ions abou he p oduc ion o he wo commi ing i ms a e ealised
immedia ely, i.e., a he same logical ime as he announcemen wi hou he need o know
he p e ailing equilib ium). As consume s conside he commi ed ou pu o bo h i ms,
subs i u ing ou yi=qiand yj=qjin o Eq. (A.2) gi es he linea in e se demand o
p oduc o ne wo k iunde C/C, ha is:
pC/C
i=1−qi−qj+n(qi+qj)(A3)
The mic oeconomic ounda ions o he ma ke demand when one i m
c edibly commi s i sel o an announced ou pu le el and he i al does
no
In he asymme ic scena io in which only i m, say i m i, can c edibly commi i sel o an
announced ou pu le el, consume s know he quan i y ha will be p oduced by ha i m ( he
consume s’ expec a ions abou he p oduc ion o he commi ing i m a e ealised imme-
dia ely, i.e., a he same logical ime as he announcemen wi hou he need o know he
p e ailing equilib ium), whe eas hey ha e expec a ions abou he ne wo k size o he non-
commi ing i m,say i m j.In hiscase,consume s’expec a ionsabou hequan i yp oduced
by i m jbecome binding, and hey a e ealised in equilib ium. Consume s a e a ional so
ha hey can know in ad ance (in he logical iming o he e en s) he p e ailing equilib ium
alue o he ou pu . Knowing ha consume s conside he commi ed ou pu only o i m i,
subs i u ing ou yi=qiin o Eq. (A.2) gi es he linea in e se demand o p oduc o ne wo k
iunde C/NC, ha is:
pC/NC
i=1−qi−qj+n(qi+yj)(A4)
P oo o P oposi ion 1
Le nbe posi i e. I 0 ≤b<0.219 hen A(n,b)>0, B(n,b)<0andC(n,b)>
0 o any0≤n<nC(b);A(n,b)>0, B(n,b)<0andC(n,b)<0 o
any nC(b)<n<1 so ha Poin [1] holds. I 0.219 <b<0.313 hen A(n,b)<0,
B(n,b)>0andC(n,b)>0 o any0≤n<nB(b);A(n,b)<0,B(n,b)<
0andC(n,b)>0 o anynB(b)<n<nA(b);A(n,b)>0, B(n,b)<0and
C(n,b)>0 o anynA(b)<n<nC(b);A(n,b)>0, B(n,b)<0and
C(n,b)<0 o anynC(b)<n<1 so ha Poin [2] holds. I 0.313 <b<0.393
hen A(n,b)<0, B(n,b)>0andC(n,b)>0 o any0≤n<nA(b);
A(n,b)>0, B(n,b)>0andC(n,b)>0 o anynA(b)<n<nB(b);
A(n,b)>0, B(n,b)<0andC(n,b)>0 o anynB(b)<n<nC(b);
A(n,b)>0, B(n,b)<0andC(n,b)<0 o anynC(b)<n<1 so ha Poin
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
[3] holds. I 0.393 <b<0.4013 hen A(n,b)<0, B(n,b)>0andC(n,b)>
0 o any0≤n<nA(b);A(n,b)>0, B(n,b)>0andC(n,b)>0o
C(n,b)<0 o anynA(b)<n<nB(b);A(n,b)>0, B(n,b)<0and
C(n,b)<0 o anynB(b)<n<1 so ha Poin [4] holds. I 0.4013 <b<0.5 hen
A(n,b)<0,B(n,b)>0andC(n,b)>0 o any0≤n<nA(b);A(n,b)>
0, B(n,b)>0andC(n,b)>0o C(n,b)<0 o anynA(b)<n<1so ha
Poin [5] holds. Le nbe nega i e. I 0 ≤b<0.115 hen A(n,b)<0, B(n,b)>0
and C(n,b)<0 o any0>n>−1. I 0 ≤b<0.115 hen A(n,b)<0,
B(n,b)>0andC(n,b)<0 o any0>n>−1 so ha Poin [6] holds. I
0.115 <b<0.168 hen A(n,b)<0, B(n,b)>0andC(n,b)<0 o any
0>n>−nB(b);A(n,b)<0, B(n,b)<0andC(n,b)<0 o any−nB(b)>
n>−1 so ha Poin [7] holds. I 0.168 <b<0.219 hen A(n,b)<0, B(n,b)>0
and C(n,b)<0 o any0>n>−nB(b);A(n,b)<0, B(n,b)<0and
C(n,b)<0 o any−nB(b)>n>−nA(b);A(n,b)>0, B(n,b)<0and
C(n,b)<0 o any−nA(b)>n>−1 so ha Poin [8] holds. I 0.219 <b<0.333
hen A(n,b)>0, B(n,b)<0andC(n,b)<0 o any0>n>−1so ha
Poin [9] holds. I 0.333 <b<bNC/NC
T(n) hen A(n,b)>0, B(n,b)<0and
C(n,b)<0 o any0>n>−1−2b
bso ha Poin [10] holds. Q.E.D.
The CSR-CDG in a S ackelbe g en i onmen
The CSR-CDG is a mul i-s age non-coope a i e game wi h comple e in o ma ion in which,
in he i s decision-making s age, each i m chooses o c edibly commi o no o commi
o an announced ou pu le el. This is a bina y choice ha happens be o e consume s make
hei pu chase decisions and hen a ec s hei expec a ions abou he p e ailing ne wo k
size. Consume s a e a ional and ha e a ional expec a ions. I a leas one o he wo i ms is
commi ing, he consume s’ expec a ions abou he p oduc ion o he commi ing i m(s) a e
ealised immedia ely, i.e., a he same logical ime as he announcemen wi hou he need o
know he p e ailing equilib ium. I a leas one o he wo i ms is no commi ing, consume s’
expec a ionsbecomebinding,and heya e ealisedinequilib iumasconsume sa e a ionalso
ha hey can know in ad ance (in he logical iming o he e en s) he p e ailing equilib ium
alue o he ou pu . This hold in an in e media e s age be ween he decision-making s age and
he ma ke s age. In he ma ke s age, compe i ion be ween i ms can occu simul aneously
(Cou no ) o sequen ially (S ackelbe g). In he o me case, any decision o each i m can
only be expec ed by he i al because he logical iming o e en s is such ha no playe can
obse e each o he ’s decisions ega dless o whe he a i m c edibly commi s i sel o an
announced ou pu le el. This case has been analysed in he main ex o he a icle. In he
la e case, one i m ( he leade ) chooses be o e i s i al, who is he e o e o ced o become
a ollowe choosing i s p oduc ion a e ha ing obse ed he p oduc ion – and he decision
o c edibly commi o no o commi – by he leade . This sec ion deals wi h his case and
de elops he CSR-CDG in which a he ma ke s age quan i y compe i ion occu s sequen ially
acco ding o he S ackelbe g ules.
Le us assume ha i m iis he leade and i m jis he ollowe . The game is sol ed by
using he backwa d induc ion logic and conside s p o i s as he main a iable a he decision-
making s age. The s uc u e o he ou sub-games is he ollowing: (i) bo h i ms c edibly
commi hemsel es o an announced ou pu le el (C/C), he leade commi s i sel be o e
he ollowe does; (ii) bo h i ms do no (o canno ) commi hemsel es o an announced
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
s a egy Co s a egy NC. In addi ion, we ha e also assumed, in he sub-game NC/Co he
S ackelbe g model p esen ed in he p e ious sec ion o his appendix, in which he leade is
no commi ing, ha , he c edible public announcemen o ou pu commi men by he by he
C- i m occu s ex-pos , i.e., a e he i al selec ed s a egy NC.
The e o e, acco ding o he e iewe ’s poin , he symme ic sub-games can be played
acco ding o he Cou no ules bu in he asymme ic sub-games he C- i m (ei he i m i
o i m j) always becomes a S ackelbe g leade . This implies ha he equilib ium esul s o
he asymme ic sub-game C/NC ob ained by conside ing a S ackelbe g scena io in which
i m iis he leade a e he same as hose eme ging in he model o he p esen sec ion. This
implies ha CSR-CDG à la S ackelbe g is an asymme ic game and he CSR-CDG à la
Cou no -S ackelbe g is a symme ic game.
To sum up, in he Cou no -S ackelbe g CSR-CDG bo h C- i ms in he symme ic sub-
game C/Cpublic announce, o some eason, hei ou pu commi men in he same logical
iming o he e en s, whe eas he C- i m in he asymme ic sub-games C/NC and NC/C
public announces, o some eason, i s ou pu commi men be o e he i al’s akes any ac ions
and hen he C- i m becomes a S ackelbe g leade . O cou se, his modi ies he logical iming
o he e en s occu ing (simul aneously) in he symme ic sub-games om hose occu ing
(sequen ially) in he asymme ic sub-games.
The payo ma ix (p o i s) ha i ms ace in he i s decision-making s age o he CSR-
CDG played in a Cou no -S ackelbe g en i onmen is composed o Eqs. (13), (20), (A.15)
and (A.16). The SPNE o he game a e ob ained by compu ing he usual p o i di e en ials
ha we do no epo he e o sa e space. The main esul s a e summa ised in Fig. A2 , which
igo ously epo s he lociin which hep o i di e en ialsa eze oand he easibili ycondi ion
ha mus besa is ied ogua an eeposi i ep o i sin hesub-game NC/NC.The igu e epo s
he loci o poin s such ha CS
A(n,b)=0, CS
B(n,b)=0andCS
C(n,b)=0, i.e.,
nCS
A(b),nCS
B(b)and nCS
C(b) espec i ely, whe e he supe -sc ip CS s ands o “Cou no -
S ackelbe g”. Resul s a e quali a i ely like hose ob ained in he Cou no model o he main
ex and he S ackelbe g model o he p e ious sec ion o he appendix.
Posi i e ne wo k e ec s
•A ea A:(C,C)is he unique SPNE (CS
A(n,b)>0, CS
B(n,b)<0and
CS
C(n,b)>0), which is Pa e o ine icien . The CSR-CDG à la Cou no -S ackelbe g
is a p isone ’s dilemma wi h commi ing i ms.
•A ea B:(C,C)is he unique SPNE (CS
A(n,b)>0, CS
B(n,b)<0and
CS
C(n,b)<0), which is Pa e o e icien . The CSR-CDG à la Cou no -S ackelbe g
is an an i-p isone ’s dilemma wi h commi ing i ms.
•A ea C:(C,C)and (NC,NC)a e wo symme ic SPNE (CS
A(n,b)<0,
CS
B(n,b)<0andCS
C(n,b)>0), bu NC payo domina es C. The CSR-CDG à
la Cou no -S ackelbe g is a coo dina ion game.
•A ea D:(NC,NC)is he unique SPNE (CS
A(n,b)<0, CS
B(n,b)>0and
CS
C(n,b)>0), which is Pa e o e icien . The CSR-CDG à la Cou no -S ackelbe g
is an an i-p isone ’s dilemma wi h non-commi ing i ms.
•A ea Eand A ea F:(C,NC)and (NC,C)a e wo asymme ic SPNE (CS
A(n,b)>0,
CS
B(n,b)>0), which a e Pa e o e icien , and he C- i m ge s he bes ou come.
Nega i e ne wo k e ec s
•A ea G:(C,C)is he unique SPNE (CS
A(n,b)>0, CS
B(n,b)<0and
CS
C(n,b)<0), which is Pa e o e icien . The CSR-CDG à la Cou no -S ackelbe g
is an an i-p isone ’s dilemma wi h commi ing i ms.
123

Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
Fig. A.2 The CSR-CDG à la Cou no -S ackelbe g: SPNE when nand b a y and he i m’s p o i is he decision
a iable.Thesand-colou ed egion ep esen heun easiblepa ame e space,whichisbounded by he h eshold
b<1
2−n:= bNC/NC
T(n). The easibili y condi ion mus be sa is ied o gua an ee posi i e p o i s in he sub-
game NC/NC. Ligh -blue egion (F): (C,NC)and (NC,C)a e wo asymme ic SPNE wi h he C- i m
ge ing he bes ou come and he CSR-CDG à la Cou no -S ackelbe g is an an i-coo dina ion game. This
acco ds wi h he egion below (E), in which he CSR-CDG à la Cou no -S ackelbe g is an an i-coo dina ion
game and C- i m con inues o ge he bes ou come
•A ea H:(C,C)and (NC,NC)a e wo symme ic SPNE (CS
A(n,b)<0,
CS
B(n,b)<0andCS
C(n,b)<0), bu Cpayo domina es NC. The CSR-CDG à
la Cou no -S ackelbe g is a coo dina ion game.
•A ea I:(C,C)and (NC,NC)a e wo symme ic SPNE (CS
A(n,b)<0,
CS
B(n,b)<0andCS
C(n,b)<0), bu Cpayo domina es NC. The CSR-CDG à
la Cou no -S ackelbe g is a coo dina ion game.
•A ea L:(C,C)is he unique SPNE (CS
A(n,b)>0, CS
B(n,b)<0and
CS
C(n,b)<0), which is Pa e o e icien . The CSR-CDG à la Cou no -S ackelbe g
is an an i-p isone ’s dilemma wi h commi ing i ms.
Cou no e sus S ackelbe g
This sec ion discusses some possible ad ancemen s o he modelling se up used in he p esen
pape by speci ically concen a ing on he compa ison be ween he simul aneous Cou no
se ing and he sequen ial S ackelbe g se ing. The discussion begins by conside ing he
delega ion li e a u e amed in s a egic compe i i e ma ke s de eloped by Fe sh man and
Judd (1987), Skli as (1987) and Vicke s (1985), FJVS hence o h.
The manage ial delega ion game à la FJSV ep esen s a classic example in which he
choices o he playe s a e always simul aneous in all sub-games, i.e., he scena io is he
Cou no -Nash one. This implies ha in he asymme ic sub-game whe e, o example, he
owne o i miis delega ing he ou pu o a manage and i m jis p o i maximizing, he
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
Fig. A.3 The CSR-CDG: Cou no e sus S ackelbe g. The ed line is he cu e de ining, in he space (b,n),
he indi e ence o play he CSR-CDG acco ding o he Cou no -Nash (simul aneous) ules o acco ding o
he S ackelbe g (sequen ial) ules wi h posi i e and nega i e alues o n
same payo s (p o i s) a e ob ained as in he case whe e he delega ing i m iis he leade
and he p o i -maximising i m jis he ollowe in he p oduc ma ke like in a S ackelbe g
scena io. This, in u n, implies ha p o i s unde Cou no -Nash o S ackelbe g coincide (see,
o example, he payo ma ix in Fan i e al., 2017,Table1, p. 498, whe e his esul is clea ly
illus a ed).
Howe e , in a game à la FJSV, he SPNE is always he one in which bo h i ms choose he
Cou no -Nash delega ion s a egy (so he asymme ic case in which one i m is delega ing
and he i al is p o i -maximising does no eme ge as a possible SPNE o his kind o endoge-
nous s a egic delega ion games). The e o e, he o e lapping o p o i s be ween Cou no and
S ackelbe g is no s a egically in e es ing in ha case. Indeed, i is also well known ha ade-
qua e changes o he FJSV model may imply, in he asymme ic sub-game in which one i m
is delega ing and he i al is p o i -maximising, ha i i ms choose acco ding o he S ackel-
be g ules (sequen ially) and no acco ding o he Cou no -Nash ule (simul aneously) hen
unde app op ia e pa ame ic condi ions he s a egic si ua ion o mixed choices (in which
i is assumed compe i ion à la S ackelbe g) may eme ge as he SPNE o he game: his is
he case in Basu’s (1995) con ibu ion. Fo he sake o p ecision, we no e ha Basu’s (1995)
model is e y speci ic in he s a egic delega ion li e a u e à la FJSV, as esul s equi e he
p esence o ixed hi ing manage ial cos s, which a e commonly neglec ed.
The analysis below aims o cla i y he ollowing ques ion. Is i possible ha he quan i ies
chosen simul aneously in he p oduc ma ke gene a e he o e lapping o he co esponding
Cou no -Nash payo s (p o i s) wi h he payo s (p o i s) ob ained in a sequen ial S ackelbe g
scena io in which he commi ing C- i m is he leade and he non-commi ing NC- i m is
he ollowe ? The answe is posi i e, bu his applies o a speci ic pa ame ic se . Indeed,
he e exis s a cu e de ined by he equa ion x(b,n)=0 such ha he p o i s ollowing he
simul aneous Cou no -Nash scena io in which i m iis playing Cand i m jis playing NC
coincide wi h he p o i s ollowing he sequen ial S ackelbe g scena io in which he C- i m i
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
is he leade and he NC- i m jis he ollowe . This unc ion is compu ed as he di e ence
be ween he p o i s o i m i( esp. i m j) in he asymme ic sub-game o he Cou no -Nash
scena io, as gi en by Eq. (33) ( esp. Equa ion (34)) in he main ex and he p o i s o i m i
( esp. i m j) in he asymme ic sub-game o he S ackelbe g scena io in which he C- i m
is he leade and he NC- i m is he ollowe , as gi en by Eq. (A.15) ( esp. Eq. (A.16)).
The cu e x(b,n)=0, as depic ed in Fig. A3 (in which he solu ions in he space (b,n)o
he p o i di e en ials o i m iand i m jdiscussed so a jus o e lap), is de ined only in
an implici o m as i is no possible o explici nas a unc ion o bo ice e sa in a nea
analy ical o m. Thus, only o he pa ame ic se in he space (b,n)de ined by x(b,n)does
he Cou no -Nash simul aneous choice hold as i i we e a S ackelbe g sequen ial se -up a
he ma ke s age. This esul o ou commi men decision game exac ly esembles ha o
Basu (1995) o his manage ial delega ion game.
This also means ha a pa ame ic egion ( o ins ance, abo e he cu e de ined by he ed
line x(b,n)=0 in Fig. A3 o posi i e alues o n) does exis in which he S ackelbe g ou -
come a ises endogenously h ough he commi men s a egy wi hin he commi men decision
game like he delega ion s a egy eme ges in he s a egic delega ion game o Basu (1995).
This basic analysis aises ques ions ha can be o impo ance abou he mode o com-
pe i ion (endogenous o de o mo es) ha can eme ge as a Nash ou come (SPNE) o an
endogenous iming game à la Hamil on and Slu sky (1990) wi h CSR commi ing and non-
commi ing i ms in a ne wo k indus y. I he e en s happen simul aneously, he compe i ion
in he sub-game holds à la Cou no . I he e en s happen sequen ially, he compe i ion in
he sub-game holds à la S ackelbe g. The endogenous SPNE o he game can be ei he he
simul aneous mo e o he sequen ial mo e. This imp o emen is le o u u e esea ch.
Re e ences
Ami , R., E ickson, P., & Jin, J. (2017). On he mic oeconomic ounda ions o linea demand o di e en ia ed
p oduc s. Jou nal o Economic Theo y, 169, 641–665.
Ba on, D. P. (2001). P i a e poli ics, co po a e social esponsibili y, and in eg a ed s a egy. Jou nal o Eco-
nomics & Managemen S a egy, 10, 7–45.
Ba on,D.P. (2009).Aposi i e heo y o mo almanagemen ,social p essu e, and co po a esocialpe o mance.
Jou nal o Economics & Managemen S a egy, 18, 7–43.
Basu, K. (1995). S ackelbe g equilib ium in oligopoly: An explana ion based on manage ial incen i es. Eco-
nomics Le e s, 49, 459–464.
Bénabou, R., & Ti ole, J. (2010). Indi idual and co po a e social esponsibili y. Economica, 77, 1–19.
Bha acha jee, T., & Pal, R. (2014). Ne wo k ex e nali ies and s a egic manage ial delega ion in Cou no
duopoly: Is he e a p isone s’ dilemma? Re iew o Ne wo k Economics, 12, 343–353.
Bischi,G.I., S e anini,L.,& Ga dini,L.(1998). Synch oniza ion,in e mi ency andc i icalcu esina duopoly
game. Ma hema ics and Compu e s in Simula ion, 44, 559–585.
Bischi, G. I., Gallega i, M., & Naimzada, A. (1999). Symme y-b eaking bi u ca ions and ep esen a i e i m
in dynamic duopoly games. Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch, 89, 252–271.
B and, B., & G o he, M. (2015). Social esponsibili y in a bila e al monopoly. Jou nal o Economics, 115,
275–289.
Buccella,D.,Fan i,L.,&Go i,L.(2022a).Ne wo kex e nali ies,p oduc compa ibili yandp ocessinno a ion.
Economics o Inno a ion and New Technology, Fo hcoming.h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/10438599.2022.
2095513
Buccella, D., Fan i, L., & Go i, L. (2022b). A no e on R&D inno a ion wi h socially esponsible i ms. I alian
Economic Jou nal, Fo hcoming,.h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s40797-022-00214-2
Cab al, L. (1990). On he adop ion o inno a ions wi h “ne wo k” ex e nali ies. Ma hema ical Social Sciences,
19, 299–308.
Cab al, L., Salan , D., & Wo och, G. (1999). Monopoly p icing wi h ne wo k ex e nali ies. In e na ional
Jou nal o Indus ial O ganiza ion, 17, 199–214.
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
Chi co, A., & Sc imi o e, M. (2013). Choosing p ice o quan i y? The ole o delega ion and ne wo k ex e -
nali ies. Economics Le e s, 121, 482–486.
Choi, K., & Lim, S. (2022). Endogenous expec a ions managemen wi h ne wo k e ec s: A no e. B.E. Jou nal
o Theo e ical Economics, 22, 649–668.
Choné, P., & Linneme , L. (2020). Linea demand sys ems o di e en ia ed goods: O e iew and use ’s guide.
In e na ional Jou nal o Indus ial O ganiza ion, 73, 102663.
Deloi e (2019). The ise o he socially esponsible business. Deloi e Global socie al impac su ey, Janua y
2019.
Fan i, L., & Buccella, D. (2016). Ba gaining agenda and en y in a unionised model wi h ne wo k e ec s.
I alian Economic Jou nal, 2, 91–121.
Fan i, L., & Buccella, D. (2017). Co po a e social esponsibili y in a game- heo e ic con ex . Economia e
Poli ica Indus iale, 44, 371–390.
Fan i, L., & Buccella, D. (2018). Co po a e social esponsibili y and manage ial bonus sys ems. I alian Eco-
nomic Jou nal, 4, 349–365.
Fan i,L.,&Go i,L.(2013).Fe ili y- ela edpensionsandcyclicalins abili y.Jou nal o Popula ion Economics,
26, 1209–1232.
Fan i, L., & Go i, L. (2019). Code e mina ion, p ice compe i ion and he ne wo k indus y. Ge man Economic
Re iew, 20, e795–e830.
Fan i, L., Go i, L., & Sodini, M. (2017). Manage ial delega ion heo y e isi ed. Manage ial and Decision
Economic, 38, 490–512.
Fe nández-K anz, D., & San aló, J. (2010). When necessi y becomes a i ue: The e ec o p oduc ma -
ke compe i ion on co po a e social esponsibili y. Jou nal o Economics & Managemen S a egy, 19,
453–487.
Fe sh man, C., & Judd, K. L. (1987). Equilib ium incen i es in oligopoly. Ame ican Economic Re iew, 77,
927–940.
F iedman, M., (1970) The social esponsibili y o business is o inc ease i s p o i s. New Yo k Times Magazine,
Sep embe .
Ga cia-Gallego, A., & Geo gan zís, N. (2009). Ma ke e ec s o changes in consume s social esponsibili y.
Jou nal o Economics & Managemen S a egy, 18, 235–262.
Goe ing, G. E. (2007). The s a egic use o manage ial incen i es in a non-p o i i m mixed duopoly. Man-
age ial and Decision Economics, 28, 83–91.
Goe ing, G. E. (2008). Wel a e impac s o a non-p o i i m in mixed comme cial ma ke s. Economic Sys ems,
32, 326–334.
Go i, L., & Sodini, M. (2020). Endogenous labou supply, endogenous li e ime and economic de elopmen .
S uc u al Change and Economic Dynamics, 52, 238–259.
Go i, L., & Sodini, M. (2021). A con ibu ion o he heo y o e ili y and economic de elopmen . Mac oe-
conomic Dynamics, 25, 753–775.
Go i, L., Gue ini, L., & Sodini, M. (2015). Equilib ium and disequilib ium dynamics in cobweb models wi h
ime delays. In e na ional Jou nal o Bi u ca ion and Chaos, 25, 1550088.
G i a, K., & Ve as, N. (2011). P ice compe i ion in a di e en ia ed p oduc s duopoly unde ne wo k e ec s.
In o ma ion Economics and Policy, 23, 85–97.
Hagiu, A., & Halabu da, H. (2014). In o ma ion and wo-sided pla o m p o i s. In e na ional Jou nal o
Indus ial O ganiza ion, 34, 25–35.
Hamil on, J. H., & Slu sky, S. M. (1990). Endogenous iming in duopoly games: S ackelbe g o Cou no
equilib ia. Games and Economic Beha io , 2, 29–46.
Hoe nig, S. (2012). S a egic delega ion unde p ice compe i ion and ne wo k e ec s. Economics Le e s, 117,
487–489.
Hommes, C. H. (1994). Dynamics o he cobweb model wi h adap i e expec a ions and nonlinea supply and
demand. Jou nal o Economic Beha io & O ganiza ion, 24, 315–335.
Ka z, M., & Shapi o, C. (1985). Ne wo k ex e nali ies, compe i ion, and compa ibili y. Ame ican Economic
Re iew, 75, 424–440.
Kopel, M., & B and, B. (2012). Socially esponsible i ms and endogenous choice o s a egic incen i es.
Economic Modelling, 29, 982–989.
Kopel, M., & Laman ia, F. (2018). The pe sis ence o social s a egies unde inc easing compe i i e p essu e.
Jou nal o Economic Dynamics and Con ol, 91, 71–83.
Kopel, M., Laman ia, F., & Szida o szky, F. (2014). E olu iona y compe i ion in a mixed ma ke wi h socially
conce ned i ms. Jou nal o Economic Dynamics and Con ol, 48, 394–409.
KPMG(2015).Cu en so Change:KPMGSu eyo Co po a e esponsibili y epo ing2015.A ailableonline
a h p://www.kpmg.com/cn/en/issuesandinsigh s/a iclespublica ions/pages/kpmg-su ey-o -co po a e-
esponsibili y- epo ing-2015-o-201511.aspx.
123
Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch
KPMG (2017). The Road Ahead: KPMG Su ey o Co po a e esponsibili y epo ing 2017.
A ailable online a h ps://asse s.kpmg/con en /dam/kpmg/xx/pd /2017/10/kpmg-su ey-o -co po a e-
esponsibili y- epo ing-2017.pd .
Lambe ini, L., Tampie i, A., (2010). Co po a e social esponsibili y in a mixed oligopoly. Depa men o
Economics, Uni e si y o Bologna, Wo king Pape No. 723.
Lambe ini, L., & Tampie i, A. (2015). Incen i es, pe o mance and desi abili y o socially esponsible i ms
in a Cou no oligopoly. Economic Modelling, 50, 40–48.
Lambe ini, L., Pales ini, A., & Tampie i, A. (2016). CSR in an asymme ic duopoly wi h en i onmen al
ex e nali y. Sou he n Economic Jou nal, 83, 236–252.
Leppänen, I. (2020). Pa ial commi men in an endogenous iming duopoly. Annals o Ope a ions Resea ch,
287, 783–799.
McKinsey (2019). Fi e ways ha ESG c ea es alue. McKinsey Qua e ly, No embe 14, 2019.
Nakamu a, Y. (2021). P ice e sus quan i y in a duopoly wi h ne wo k ex e nali ies unde ac i e and passi e
expec a ions. Manage ial and Decision Economics, 42, 120–133.
Naska , M., & Pal, R. (2020). Ne wo k ex e nali ies and p ocess R&D: A Cou no -Be and compa ison.
Ma hema ical Social Sciences, 103, 51–58.
Plane -F ied ich, L., & Sahm, M. (2020). S a egic co po a e social esponsibili y, impe ec compe i ion, and
ma ke concen a ion. Jou nal o Economics, 129, 79–101.
Reu e s (2020). Th ee op Apple supplie s o commi $900 million o India sma phone incen i e plan –
sou ces. Sep embe 28, 2020. A ailable on-line a h ps://www. eu e s.com/a icle/india-sma phone-
manu ac u ing-idUSKBN26J1TJ
Sh i as a , S. (2021). Ne wo k compa ibili y, in ensi y o compe i ion and p ocess R&D: A gene aliza ion.
Ma hema ical Social Sciences, 109, 152–163.
Shy, O. (2011). A sho su ey o ne wo k economics. Re iew o Indus ial O ganiza ion, 38, 119–149.
Skli as,S.D.(1987). Thes a egicchoiceo manage ialincen i es.RAND Jou nal o Economics, 18,452–458.
Siegel, D. S., & Vi aliano, D. F. (2007). An empi ical analysis o he s a egic use o co po a e social espon-
sibili y. Jou nal o Economics & Managemen S a egy, 16, 773–792.
Song, R., & Wang, L. F. S. (2017). Collusion in a di e en ia ed duopoly wi h ne wo k ex e nali ies. Economics
Le e s, 152, 23–26.
Suleymano a, I., & Wey, C. (2012). On he ole o consume expec a ions in ma ke s wi h ne wo k e ec s.
Jou nal o Economics, 105, 101–127.
Toshimi su, T. (2019). Commen on P ice and quan i y compe i ion in ne wo k goods duopoly: A e e sal
esul . Economics Bulle in, 39, 1855–1859.
Toshimi su, T. (2021). No e on excess capaci y in a monopoly ma ke wi h ne wo k ex e nali ies. Jou nal o
Indus y, Compe i ion and T ade, 21, 411–422.
Vicke s, J. (1985). Delega ion and he heo y o he i m. Economic Jou nal, 95, 138–147.
Publishe ’s No e Sp inge Na u e emains neu al wi h ega d o ju isdic ional claims in published maps and
ins i u ional a ilia ions.
123